On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk> wrote:
> > I am in favor of eliminating the read-only/write-only keywords and >> implementing no "special code" to make what was read-only/write-only >> language enforced. I think the alternatives with final are just fine and >> good enough and will let userland programming enforce it if they so desire. >> > But the question still remains. Isn't a read only variable simply a > 'const'? Why do we need anything more than that? It explains exactly why it > has been defined without any ambiguity and works everywhere. > A read-only variable may be calculated from other values, and there may not be an inverse calculation. As a concrete example, consider an invoice total calculated from line items. It will change as the line items change, but it wouldn't make sense to me to be able to set the order total and have that somehow be back-propagated to the line items.
